Is Jesus God in the Gospel of Mark?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 чер 2024
- For tickets click here now: inspiringphilosophy.org/bigdeb...
Mike Licona's channel: / milico885
Don't forget to help us create more videos! We need your support:
/ inspiringphilosophy
/ @inspiringphilosophy
#Christ #Bible #Yahweh - Розваги
Mark's reveal of the divinity of Christ is one of my favourite things in the Bible. Once you see it, it destroys the idea of a "developing Christology"
Could you point to any sources or videos that debunks the "developing christology" claims
@@delightk ua-cam.com/video/JrRW66Ye9M4/v-deo.html
@@delightk ua-cam.com/video/xJdTXb8J6PI/v-deo.html
Can I ask what "developing Christology" is?
Edit:typo
@@delightk ua-cam.com/video/RmRdZmPIGrA/v-deo.html
“They’re not writing for us; they’re writing for their ancient audience” Great line
"For the Son of man is the LORD of Sabbath"- LORD JESUS.
Because the Sabbath is made for man.
That's the reason the man Christ Jesus was made Lord over the Sabbath.
@@johndevisser903*for man’s enjoyment* then Jesus goes on to say that He’s the Lord of the Sabbath anyway. He’s basically saying “back off bc I can do what I want.”
@@Kingrich_777 it also spits in the face of how the Jews didn't do ANYTHING that even be described as work.
And then Jesus comes along basically implying, "it ain't work if you do what you want. Honor Me by ENJOYING the Sabbath."
@@johndevisser903 He wasn't made Lord over the Sabbath. He always was Lord over the Sabbath.
Just an english word
We could tell someone what is in a darkened room, and then turn on the light so they could see. Or we could simply turn on the light and trusts they can see for themselves. In that sense, Mark writes to illuminate his readers with descriptions of events in a way that allows them the opportunity to make their own observations and draw conclusions based on that information.
Exactly. I can't even read Mark 1 without the overwhelming impression that Mark is saying that Jesus is God.
As a regular person, reading the English translation of Mark, I really don't see the issue. It's clear that Jesus is God by his own claims in the gospel of Mark
He claimed he was messiah only once in the whole book of Mark, so it should not be surprising if he claimed divinity only few times in that whole book of Mark. Jesus did claim divinity immediately after confirming Messiah: If Jesus claimed divinity, the Pharisees would accuse him blasphemy . This is exactly what happened and one of the ways we know that Jesus claimed divinity and thus was immediately accused of blasphemy when Jesus referred himself to a specific son of man prophesied in the old testament that is going to receive the service due to God alone in Mark 14:62, when Jesus says you will see the son of man sitting at the right hand of the power and Coming With the Clouds of Heaven. Pharisees knew the old testament. Jesus was referring himself to that son of man in the vision prophesy of the old testament book of Daniel 7: 13-14, this is an Old Testament section of the Bible by Prophet Daniel. Prophet Daniel sees in a vision and he sees in the sky one who looks like a son of man who Comes With the Clouds of Heaven and came to the Ancient of Days and presented himself. The last word in verse 13 in hebrew is haq-rə-ḇū-hî. transliteration: "qereb" "And was presented" ("to approach/come near/ present"). The question is: who "is approaching/was brought near/was presented"? The son of man is approaching/was presented. Immediately After this last hebrew word Concerning the approaching/presented son of man, the hebrew phrase "to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom that all people, nations and languages should "Serve" him. The special unique Hebrew/Aramaic word for "Serve" in this instance is the word "pelach". This specific word choice is used only for service reserved for God alone as worship, unlike other words for serve. Hebrew transliteration of the word: pelach, means only service to God. There are other words in Hebrew for "serve," but those other words for serve are not reserved for service to God alone. Those other words for serve are used to refer to service toward kings, elders, fathers..etc. After verse 13, verse 14 says, he was given dominion by someone and people will "serve" him. If Jesus did claim divinity, the Pharisees would indeed charge him of blasphemy. And that is exactly what they did. They charged him with blasphemy right after Jesus declared himself to be that son of man prophesied in the old testament who would be served the service that is only due God. Check out the immediate verse after Mark 14:62 (The verse Jesus referred to himself as that son of man of the old testament). The immediate verse Mark 14:63-64 says that the Pharisees were angry and said that Jesus committed blasphemy. Even in the old testament, Prophet Isaiah mentioned that a human would be born that will be called "Mighty God and Everlasting Father" (Isaiah 9:6)
Jesus has a God of whom he claims that it is our God aswell
There's only one true God wich is the God of the man Christ Jesus
@@johndevisser903 Yup, there's one God and He's the God of the man Jesus Christ, did you think that surprises us? Jesus had two natures, the divine nature (hence Jesus said: I am Lord over the passage) and a human nature, and it's explained why He would come in human form in Phillipians 2
Thank you o my friend. I sometimes find it puzzling the nonsense claims that some non Christians make of the SCRIPTURE that just isn't there. There's zero time that I've ever had any doubt that the DEITY of CHRIST is evident in the Gospel according to Mark anytime that I've read any portion of it. What kind of satanic deception possess these people that that they go to almost any length to make these foolish claims? Yikes.
Do you have an example of such a claim?
About time atheists and Muslims are shown the evidence of the deity of Christ in Mark.
Hopefully then they can stop regurgitating the same bad arguments.
You mean the CLAIM to deity, right?
And what evidence is that?
@@derekallen4568 ua-cam.com/video/JrRW66Ye9M4/v-deo.html
@@theoskeptomai2535 No those are two different things. Jesus' deity in Mark meant that we can tell Mark thought Jesus was divine and earnestly bekieved that he was communicating this belief through his book. If we said that in Mark there is Jesus' claim to divinity we may be implying a disinterested distance between Mark's beliefs and what Jesus said, a distance that isn't there. For example, if I wrote a paragraph about the time I saw the 2020 european football championship, I am not recording Italy's claim to their trophey, I am recording the bare events that clearly imply that Italy won the trophey, even if I don't include anything past the final block of the italian golie.
Premar
Anyone who knows anything about the OT law that a sinful man can't die for a sinful man will understand that when Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:17, "And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins, " Jesus would have to be God.
Exactly! Jesus paid for all sin on Friday, but we didn’t get the receipt (proof of payment) until Sunday.😁👍
@@Mark-cd2wf I will steal that and use it as a reason not to be mad at banks ty bro
I’ve been reading Richard Bauckham’s book, Jesus and the God of Israel. It’s really good
The fact that Jesus can bind Satan where Michael couldn't is also a way to show the JW's are wrong when they say Jesus is Michael
Micheal/jesus wasnt given authority yet by Jehovah. Michael said may Jehovah rebuke you
@@AstariahFox For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father’? Or again, ‘I will be his Father, and he will be my Son’? And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, ‘Let all God’s angels worship him.’ In speaking of the angels he says, ‘He makes his angels spirits, and his servants flames of fire.’ But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a sceptre of justice will be the sceptre of your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.’
Hebrews 1:5-9
@@seanedie1497 the whole point of hebrews is appointing jesus above the angels. Almighty God does not need to be appointed
@@AstariahFox that's my point. Jesus can't just be one of the Angeles because He's greater than them
@@seanedie1497 ya hes Michael the archangel
Jesus leads the angels and so does Micheal so there isn't 2 armies of faithful angels
Could it be that that the Synoptic gospels were avoiding direct mentions because that would make the gospel illegal in Jewish territory? A kind of indirect mention of Jesus's deity reduces chances of running into trouble with the Jewish authorities in Palestine, but still gets the message across to the intended audience.
By John's gospel's writing, Jews weren't in power, so it was probably alright to make direct claims known.
Who am I to comment and give light of this topic but I think it would still be really obvious if you’re practicing Jew to know the point made when passages of Mark 2: 7 healing and forgiving sin. That is a big red flag(l there’s much more can be cited through out Mark that is obvious for a Jew than say Gentile who doesn’t understand background, being the Old Testament )
I think your are correct like Mike Licona said we must never forget the contemporary religious context when the gospels were written ,
Can’t wait to hear/watch this one. People say that Matthew and Luke try to down play the divinity of JESUS.
True great videos, the videos on Christmas were GOLD!
One of my primary influencers with regards to understanding historical perspective has been John Lukacs and in his collection of essays called Remembered Past, he takes the position that while we are historically thinking creatures, we don't compose the best history of significant events until at least 20-30 years after they have occurred. He also posits that in general, the worst history writing is done soon after an event.
In light of that, we can presume that many letters were written in the months and years after Pentecost as educated people would have written back and forth, and most of those have been lost and even in the first century, it appears that over the two or three decades after the event of Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection, a pretty firm catechesis evolved to the point that by the time Paul was writing his epistles, he didn't need to go into a lot of details about his Christology because he could simply write these catechisms in his opening remarks and everyone would sort of already be on the same page. By 50-55AD, we have already a body of knowledge that the Christian culture could rely on and like every culture, there are 'things that go without being said' in general conversation because everyone already knows what the speaker means.
I don't pretend to understand all the complexities that arise in textural criticism, and I appreciate Bart Ehrman's intellect, as we were cronies and friends through high school, being my next door neighbor and the same age with similar interests, even helping me come to faith as a junior in high school. But historical perspective is not an easy thing to grasp for any of us, especially in seems, for the textual critic who can easily get lost in the forest and forget to ask the big questions like "why is there a forest in the first place?" or "why is this forest where it is?" or "what makes this forest particular, or is it particular at all?" because they begin to interpret the whole from the sum of the parts which can be tricky.
Very well said. The "quest for the historical Jesus" gets more and more absurd as time goes on, requiring more and more layers of (sometimes conflicting) ad hoc explanations for simple things, when the simplest explanation with the greatest scope is there all along.
Before now, my only definition of catechisms has been sets of questions and answers - especially for teaching. Please indicate what definition would apply to your use of that word.
@@rogermetzger7335 and you would be correct according to my understanding. Catechesis is the religious instruction, usually oral, and any documentation would be referenced as a catechism. The Q&A format lends itself well to oral teaching formats I assumed.
I studied mark 4 yrs back. I noticed that 5 times Jesus makes himself equal to God. This is why Jewish leaders would argue with Him and want him dead. Mark allows his readers to discover Jesus identity.
If you say that Jesus did the works of God because he is God how do you understand this verse?
“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know-
Acts 2:22 ESV
Peter tells his audience, God (not the man Jesus) did the works and wonders. Jesus was just the medium through which God worked.
What is then? Was the apostle wrong? How do you interpret him?
@@mikeschmoll7762 i have not read all the verses where apostles refer to Jesus as a man. I will answer in a general manner.
1. The apostle may be making an arguement for their listeners. And we should look not only to one verse, but the message of the whole book.
2. Apostles may be making a parallel between the messianic title 'son of man' with Jesus human nature.
3.
@@mikeschmoll7762 Jesus took flesh and dwelt among us. He has complete human nature too. One perfect human is needed to pay for the whole human kind. Only one man, that is Jesus who is perfect in every sense to pay for our sins. Because He is God incarnated.
@@susanvarghese9916 What do you think Peter means when he said "God". Does he mean the person of the Father or does he mean the divine being (whatnes)?
@@mikeschmoll7762 There is only one God. Think about a question --- are you a 'human' or 'son of human'? You are both. But you and your father are two different persons. God is the title or the divine being like we human beings. Human beings have a physical entity but God doesn't have that.
Absolutely awesome dialogue 🙏🏽🙌🏽
Clearly and loudly in multiple places in the text, but I guess not if you're massively ignorant of the context of a long list of things Jesus said.
This channel,oh this channel.I love it.
I am very excited for this. I always hear skeptics echo Bart Ehrman’s argument that Jesus identify evolved and that Mark didn’t think Jesus was God.
What did you think about Licona's view that the author of Mark strategically used OT prophecies to establish Jesus' divinity?
@@DannySmith999 I think Licona was saying that Jesus was doing things that only God did in the OT, and Mark made the connection for the reader.
I think any writer must know the conclusion of their writing from the beginning but be careful not to give it all away in the beginning.
@@100_1OO________1 We can agree that the author made the connections.
Bart doesn’t believe that. He thinks that Mark thought Jesus was a divine being. Just google this and read his blog
I think if Mark was written under the influence of Simon Peter, it makes sense that there was no direct statement but indirect statements that mean the same thing. Remember that a reoccuring theme in Mark, Jesus tells others to keep these things silent and not make him known. Then with Peter not making him known on the night of Jesus arrest, he fits the reoccuring theme the author is showing. It ends with the women who went to the tomb, "neither did they say anything to anyman."
Mark is showing that Jesus's closest followers kept "these things in (their) hearts", but they showed that He was YHWH. So Mark was letting Him be known while at the same time not letting Him be known and keeping it sacred. This also has a hidden justification for Peter's actions during the night of Jesus's arrest and trial.
It is a great literary work, eventhough the Greek is less academic than the other gospels.
We have our Father God and His Son our Lord Jesus Christ 🙏🏼❤️🕊Repent, believe in the Gospel, Be Born Again
Jesus was God. There is no difference .
@B. Enos Son of man. Son of the living God. Word of God. Anointed one. He is one with God. Prays to God. Definitely the messiah that God so loved and gave the world that who ever believe in him shall not perish but have eternal life. I don't believe he is God in the sense he is thee Father God but definitely part of the triune God. He wasn't praying to himself or meditating at the garden. When he left to pray he wouldn't pray to himself but to the father. I do believe he is diety he was crucified died and was burreied and restricted by God rather then by himself. He cried out to his father at the cross and didn't cry out to himself or his clone in the sky. There's definitely a distinction between God the Son and God the father. I do believe he sits at the right hand of power or of God and not within him or on his lap. So he's definitely God inherently and as one within God but he is person and human in sense born on earth of the holy spirit through the Virgin Mary. He was given the keys of heaven he is the only one that can break the seals of the title deed to earth and sin. Yet not even he knows the time but only the father. There is definitely a lot to unpack but yet Jesus was holy and yet humble and never lied and was true and was the truth the life and the way. No one enters but through him yet to say he is God only because of Thomas calling him my lord my God is not completely the same as acknowledging him as The father God of Glory himself. Yet they are both the same. In one. Please let me know what you think or help me distinguish.
@Stephen I think the greatest mystery is the fact that we struggle with Yeshua being the same as the Father. There is no distinction. You have an excellent grasp of the scriptures, but who died on the cross for you then?. The Angel of the Lord, Melkizedek, the burning bush (I AM), basically its all been Yeshua. He said so himself...before Abraham was, "I AM". The real secret is there is no distinction. The mystery has always been God mingling (tabernacling) with His creation to save it. He did! And only He could. No substitute sacrifice could ever pay for the evil that has befallen the earth.
@@enos4571 We have our Father God and His Son our Lord Jesus Christ 🙏🏼❤️🕊
@@LM-jz9vh satan is the father of confusion.
Excellent presentation
Thanks for the video
Thanks!
Mark starts off my by referencing the prophecy about the voice screaming in the wilderness preparing the way for YHWA; so yes, indeed he believed that Jesus is God.
Superb talk!
One thing I noticed about reading the Gospels is the similarities between Matthew and Mark.
To me, instead of seeing one influencing the other, I’d argue that both Matthew and Mark borrow from the same source. This could suggest one of two things:
1. There was an intermediate document that both Matthew and Mark borrowed from.
2. Matthew and Mark were in contact with the same eye witness to these events and recounted the person’s account in a similar manner.
They spoke with the same eye witnesses.
@@landonpotts6815 How did you come to that conclusion?
Matthew himself was an eyewitness as he was one of the twelve.
@@theoskeptomai2535, it seems likely that Matthew and Mark would have known a number of eye witnesses and would have recounted what they witnessed. Most of their books are focused on the miracles, which would require having eye witness testimony to confirm it.
@@theoskeptomai2535 they're very early sources, most scholars put them less than 50-60 years after Jesus's death, and Christian accounts place them a decade or two earlier. It's very likely that these two would've known the Apostles or communicated with them.
I found it interesting when someone (I think Islam Critiqued but I might be wrong) sited someone who pointed out, depending on which section of the Gospels you take, you can find a greater Christology in various orders. If you take the death of Jesus for example. John has nothing, Jesus just dies. Mark on the other hand has the curtain ripped in two and the Centurian declare him the Son of God.
Mark must have a higher Christology right? Right?
@@mmss3199 are you sure?
“a voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.’ ”
Mark 1:3 NIV
The word "Lord" in the quoted text is the divine name. In the opening Mark calls Jesus not just the Messiah, not just the son of God, but God himself.
What is your evidence that Mark has him be only the son of God and only from baptism? In other words, what evidence do you have that Mark teaches adoptionism?
It's also important to discuss the fact that Mark constantly uses covenantal language in the words of Jesus like the Father/Son relationship used in Suzerain/Vassal covenants in the ANE. The role of the royal messenger in the covenant was to be the spokesperson of the king, as such he was granted full power and authority by the king to bring his message to the people, no need for the king to be present. The allusions to this are clearly seen throughout the gospels, precisely because this was a crucial component of Jesus's mission.
I always like to point to Mark 1:3 to show the Divinity of Christ. Mark takes an Old Testament passage (Isaiah 40:3) about the coming of Yahweh and then applies it to say this coming of Yahweh is Jesus.
This verse is apart of the crystal clear verses in Mark where Christ is divine
Interestingly, Jesus said he was "the way" to Yahweh, not Yahweh Himself!
@@lizzard13666 no, he said he was the way to the father.
@@austinapologetics2023 Yeah exactly!
@@austinapologetics2023 Jesus agreed with the Jews of his day that Yahweh ALONE was the Father:
Mark 12:29 (NASB95) Jesus answered, “The foremost is, ‘HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD;
Mark 12:32 (NASB95) The scribe said to Him, “Right, Teacher; You have truly stated that HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM;
And:
John 17:3 (NASB95) “This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.
The Father, called Yahweh in the Shema, is the ONLY true God!
Jesus was "the way" to Yahweh, the only true God.
Thanks for this brothers, may YAH bless you both in JESUS name
The man didn't know Jesus is God, so Jesus answered him accordingly. He was teaching him that only God is good, not that he wasn't God, a separate issue.
Jesus in fact asking Nicodemus “Did you just address me as God?”
“Are you saying I am God?”
I have questions about the debate. Will it be available on UA-cam at any point? I normally view videos at double speed, and usually when they're hosted on a website that's not an option.
2:20 Mark was the first gospel I read entirely, as an atheist/agnostic, when I was writing a script for the film "King James" and I understood that Jesus was divine and this eventually lead me to actively draw near to the Lord and not just "believe" because I could believe in Jiu Jitsu or doubt it based on there being no punches in the style however until you are on the mat walking it out it might as well be as helpful as someone who took karate classes (went to church as a kid and holds a Santa Claus view of it or a romantic notion that you cam adequately defend yourself [most feign humility after bringing up that point but usually will say they'd defend their kids or the other guy would know he was in a fight even if they lost] as a kid or they found it worthless after giving it a free trial class or a month. The faith is found in the action.
very well said brother,Jesus is God .
Is there anywhere I can watch a replay of the live debate?
I think of larger issue here of Dr Licona,
About his Gospel's 'literary devices model view' VS 'reportage model view' of Dr Lydia McGrew.
I dont know whether IP have heard about them or not,, but i think its worthy to unpack this topic.
I'd like to see Lydia vs. Erhman personally as I agree with her reportage model and maximal case for the resurrection over Licona's literary devices and minimal facts approach to the resurrection.
Is the debate live at a venue or online?
Please pray for me I injured my ankle today
Going to point out that the institution of the Eucharist basically seals this point. Only God can form a new covenant which Christ does renewing or redoing the Passover. Would be great to see you discuss this topic with Bishop Barron.
Where exactly is the debate going to be? Online?
Nice video.
Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the Gospel for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes.
THANK YOU
Bart had me really confused about Mark
Bart is a conman
Philo and Josephus were both supremely Hellenized which explains why they would write biographies in the Greco Roman style
7 hours. It’s going to take me at least a week or more to watch it.
Fyi- The debate link at the end of the video is different than the link in your description. The link in the video appears to be incorrect.
I will email it web guy. I told him to make it bigdebate, not big-debate!
@@InspiringPhilosophy it is currently big-debate online
Great content Mike. I believe Mike Licona will do well in the debate for he has The Holy Spirit with him
I guess it all comes down to being more familiar with scripture than most of us might actually be, especially with regards to talking to the unbelievers who only have a casual, superficial understanding of scripture. If they studied the Old Testament and what it says about God, they would be able to see plenty of clear parallels with those passages in the New Testament when it talks about the Lord Jesus Christ. As timeless as the Bible is, it is also very much a product of its time, so it is important to read the Bible and study it as thoroughly as possible.
Mike's a good man; a whole day with Ehrman doesn't strike me as particularly appealing - it's gonna take some kindness and grace, and Mike's got both. You're good too, Michael; you've got that combination of toughness and clear thinking you also get from someone like Jim Wallace - the cop.
What sort of training do you have, or - are you just a really gifted guy that handles everything from quantum physics to profound philosophical problems effortlessly? I live in Denmark, by the way, and in Copenhagen we house - not without a fair amount of national pride - the Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen; Bohr and Einstein discussed the grounds of quantum mechanics in the late 20'ies and Einstein never accepted a probabilistic universe - God throwing dices - but a majority of physicists. to this day. stand with Bohr.
Once you realize the profound implications of nature on it's deepest levels and consciousness, you can't be a materialist anymore; something else - something significantly more exciting is going on... Thanks for your channel. Kind regards, Kim
7 hours oh my
It tells of a disciple ‘who wanted to visit Buddha one evening and on his way found that the ferry boat was missing from the bank of the river Aciravati. In faithful trust in Buddha he stepped on to the water and went as if on dry land to the very middle of the stream. Then he came out of his contented meditation on Buddha in which he had lost himself, and saw the waves and was frightened, and his feet began to sink. But he forced himself to become wrapt in his meditation again and by its power he reached the far bank safely and reached his master.’ (Garbe, pp. 56f. and Buddhist. Maerchen, pp. 46f.)
If anywhere in the Gospels Jesus said "I am God worship me" I would expect this to be a 21st century interpolation.
Exactly. Normally logical brains are turned to mush when it comes to the bible and Jesus in particular. If your mindset is that you fantasize about removing all credibility regarding Christianity to a majority of thinking people, this bias will keep you from seeing obvious reasoning regarding biblical defense.
Well then you must think the I am statements in John are all interpolations! Haha
@@Iamwrongbut Jesus never says I am God, worship me in John. He says he is the alpha and the Omega in revelation though. That isn't a 21 st century interpolation since nobody uses that in everyday language except when discussing the bible
@@charlesdarnay1365 haha to say I Am the Good shepherd is to say I am God.
To say before Abraham was I Am is to claim preexistence like God. It doesn’t get more clear than that. Plus, Yahweh is the great I Am and Jesus applies that to himself at least 7 times in John haha
@@charlesdarnay1365 it’s like me calling myself the commander in chief over and over and then someone thinking I am the president. They’d be right because that’s what I’m claiming
What was John’s objective in John chapter 20 verse 31?
This is really interesting! It answered some of my questions regarding the deity of Yeshua. I am really confused that ofcourse some other prophets did what the Lord Jesus did. Good thing it was also discussed on this video.
This video, like many others on this channel is great. My one suggestion for improvement is to stop blocking our view of the cats.
What about Eutychus? There’s no indication in the text that Paul prayed - but I suppose he could have.
ONE FOR ISRAEL MINISTRIES based in Israel has extensive resources in regards to Jesus in the Old Testament.
Yes, Jesus is God according to the Gospel of Mark!
The link to Mike's channel doesn't work anymore
Terrific video. THANK YOU.
What Bart Ehrman cannot explain, maybe you can bring this up in the debate: No one would make up a God who became human and WASHED THE FEET OF HIS DISCIPLES. And if the resurrection was a legend, why are the authors so honest and admit that the disciples were slow-witted and cowards. That Peter of all people even denied to know Jesus! No Christian would have dared to tell this incidence let alone invent it. Peter must have authorized it himself.
Who else is going to be watching the live debate?
5:50 - Mark 1:2-3, Mark 1:4 and Isaiah 40:3
7:22 - Mark 3:26-27
8:06 - Jude 1:9
9:47 - what about other people raising from the dead? Elijah, Elisha, and Peter
10:02 - Mark 5:41-42
12:57 - Mark 10:18 and goodness
13:40, 14:06 - Why isn’t Mark more explicit?
I need your help @ inspiring philosophy I am debating a Muslim online and when I bring Tacitus he says that it's not historically reliable and that he used secondary sources and he get these information from google.
@mysotiras 09 is there other sources other than Tacitus. Is the letter of Pilate to Tiberius authentic?
@@abanoubmorcos318
These are all valid historical sources mentioning Jesus.
- *Non-biblical sources by non-christians:* Talmud, Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny the younger, Phlegon, Lucian, Celsus, Mara-bar serapion, Suetonius and Thallus
- *Non-biblical sources by christians (former polytheists or jews):* Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, Didache, Shepherd of Hermas, Fragments of Papias, Justin Martyr, Aristides, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Quadratus, Aristo of Pella, Melito of Sardis, Diognetus, Epistula Apostolarium
Subbed from David Wood
Revelation 1:6 to him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood and has made us to be a Kingdom and priests to serve his GOD and FATHER .
Well? Since there is one God, everyone's God is the same, God's God is God.
Matthew,mark,Luke and John has specific terms about the four faces of Cherubim, why four characters and cherubim has 4 faces what does it mean?
There are not contradictory,they specific point of Jesus who Jesus is.
If a mechanic doesn't mention that there's a transmission in the car, while talking about other components of a car, does that mean there's no transmission in it? Or does it just mean that something is a given and you're trying to address other things.
If a person giving an intermediate piano lesson gives you sheet music and talks theory and tips for playing the piece, but they neglect to mention that the piano has keys, does it mean it doesn't have keys?
Check out Anthony Rodgers for some more good information on why Mark saw Jesus as Divine
Sam Shamoun*
🧡🧡
The URL doesn't work.
I can understand the confusion. The epistles constantly drum home that the Father is God, that God is the Father of the Christ Jesus. That Jesus is God is not made as explicitly clear as the fact that the Father is God. Strong inferences make it reasonable to conclude that Jesus was God, but why the lack of explicit clarity on such a central issue?
Exactly.. if it is true (and if it is a fundamental christian truth (!!!)) Why is it that it seems to be one of the most non explicit christian doctrines and never stated 100% clearly throughout the gospels... If we are wrong on this one it would be a shocker but it wont be the first time the church is wrong on an important topic (it would be like the protestant revolution, when the church for hundreds of years believed false doctrines and the protestants came out and pointed the errors out..)
In fact i believe Jesus himself has answered this question : (John 10):We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”(AV)
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law,(AW) ‘I have said you are “gods”’[d]?(AX) 35 If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God(AY) came-and Scripture cannot be set aside(AZ)- 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart(BA) as his very own(BB) and sent into the world?(BC) Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?(BD) 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father.(BE) 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”(BF) 39 Again they tried to seize him,(BG) but he escaped their grasp.(BH).
Watch closely Jesus' argument. He is not claiming to be God, instead his argument is that if the judges apointed by God and referenced by him in this passage (ref:psalm82:6) were called gods by God himself, then because he has greater authority than them (because he was appointed to proclaim the gospel, a law much much more important than the judges' law), then he has thse right to be called "a god", because in ancient jewish culture that basically meant you were appointed to do God's will on earth (as a mediator).
Jesus is called God plenty of times. (Hebrews 1:8, the Father calls Jesus "God") But to the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. You rule with a scepter of justice.
Titus 2:13 - "waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,"
Romans 9:5 - Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.
@@100_1OO________1 Would you agree that if we interpret the title "god" like Jesus does in the passage I referenced in my comment, it makes sense under that light? Keep in mind that the title " gods" was given to the judges by God himself (the title is repeated many times at least 4-5 in the old testament referring to the judges) was given to the Judges in the old testament times so the idea wouldnt be weird or abnormal in the old testament times and in the new testament times (since they knew scripture so well).
@@100_1OO________1 I cant stress this enough. The old testament clearly and unapologetically gives the title "god" to these human Judges, because they mediated God's will of justice to the people of israel (power was esentially given to them to judge the people, just like power was given to Jesus). The most important thing is that jesus himself says that as the judges were called "gods" he can in a way be called "god" because he speaks with authority given to him by God. (In ancient jewish culture, your representative spoke as if it was you who were talking). It would be bizzare to bring up a point that regular humans who were Gods mediators (the Judges ) were called gods by God, only to conclude his point that he (in contrast to the judges) is actually God (not like the judges). It would be an inconherent argument, beggining from one point and ending in a totally different one.
I also find it weird when people say that Mark never claim Jesus to be God. It is very clear in all over the book of Mark regarding the deity of Christ. I am a Christian, the one type who doesn't just want to follow tradition, but really understand the scripts. That's why I have been studying the scripts deeply. Another claim people make is that Jesus can't be God, because God can't be a man... Well, if God himself in the Old Testament came down to earth as a man, and brought fire from God in heaven, then how hard would it be for me to accept Jesus as a God man!
Great video! I don't understand why everyone gives Bart Ehrman so much credit or respect, he's really a second rate scholar....I believe he just pushes his agenda to sell books and make money
As an atheist, that might be the _only_ thing we agree on.
@@theoskeptomai2535 Well at least we agree on something 😃
@@UnashamedofJesus And I attended PTS (MDiv, Ecumenical Studies) right after Dr. Ehrman.
@@theoskeptomai2535 What convinced you to be an atheist? Just curious....
@@UnashamedofJesus I found that my beliefs in a god were unwarranted once I began with an approach of skepticism (beginning inquiry with no presumption). I was in seminary at the time and this was 35+ years ago.
Read Restoring the Biblical Christ: Is Jesus God? This will go through history and the Bible and demonstrate how neither the Bible taught, nor did the earliest Christians believe that Jesus was God himself (nor did they hold to any Trinitarian doctrine). The common objections are all answered therein.
“The first to speak in court sounds right-
until the cross-examination begins.” (Proverbs 18:17 NLT)
No cross-examination and people will go away thinking they are getting the truth, when they may in fact not be (according to the Scriptures). I do appreciate Mike’s work on the Bible (he has a lot of other biblical material outside of this subject). I also appreciate the fact that the debate between Mike and Bart is being promoted, but I am familiar with Dr. Ehrman’s books and debates and he simply does not cover everything as extensively as the book Restoring the Biblical Christ. Just read it with an honest heart and see what you think.
Proverbs 18:13 KJV
[13] He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
When you say none of the early Christians believed in the deity Christ, what do you do with the plethora of apostolic fathers and patristic sources that say the opposite of what you’re saying?
1. Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50-117): For our God, Jesus the Christ, was conceived by Mary according to God’s plan, both from the seed of David and of the Holy Spirit.
2. Ignatius (again): Consequently all magic and every kind of spell were dissolved, the ignorance so characteristic of wickedness vanished, and the ancient kingdom was abolished when God appeared in human form to bring the newness of eternal life.
3. Ignatius (again): For our God Jesus Christ is more visible now that he is in the Father.
4. Ignatius (again): I glorify Jesus Christ, the God who made you so wise, for I observed that you are established in an unshakable faith, having been nailed, as it were, to the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ.
5. Ignatius (again): Wait expectantly for the one who is above time: the Eternal, the Invisible, who for our sake became visible; the Intangible, the Unsuffering, who for our sake suffered, who for our sake endured in every way.
6. Polycarp of Smyrna (69-155): Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal high priest himself, the Son of God Jesus Christ, build you up in faith and truth . . ., and to us with you, and to all those under heaven who will yet believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ and in his Father who raised him from the dead.
7. Epistle of Barnabas (written c. 70-130): “If the Lord submitted to suffer for our souls, even though he is Lord of the whole world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, “Let us make humankind according to our image and likeness,” how is it, then, that he submitted to suffer at the hands of humans?”
8. Justin Martyr (100-165): And that Christ being Lord, and God the Son of God, and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush, so also was manifested at the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully by what has been said.
9. Justin Martyr “Permit me first to recount the prophecies, which I wish to do in order to prove that Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts.”
10. Justin Martyr Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Jesus] is witnessed to by Him [the Father] who established these things, as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ.
11. Justin Martyr The Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God. And of old He appeared in the shape of fire and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to the other prophets; but now in the times of your reign, having, as we before said, become Man by a virgin . . .”
12. Justin Martyr For if you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that He was God, Son of the only, unbegotten, unutterable God.
13. Tatian (110-172): We do not act as fools, O Greeks, nor utter idle tales when we announce that God was born in the form of man.
14. Melito of Sardis (d. c. 180): “He that hung up the earth in space was Himself hanged up; He that fixed the heavens was fixed with nails; He that bore up the earth was born up on a tree; the Lord of all was subjected to ignominy in a naked body - God put to death! . . . [I]n order that He might not be seen, the luminaries turned away, and the day became darkened-because they slew God, who hung naked on the tree. . . . This is He who made the heaven and the earth, and in the beginning, together with the Father, fashioned man; who was announced by means of the law and the prophets; who put on a bodily form in the Virgin; who was hanged upon the tree; who was buried in the earth; who rose from the place of the dead, and ascended to the height of heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father.”
15. Irenaeus of Lyon (120-202): “For I have shown from the Scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth. Now, the Scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like others, He had been a mere man. . . . He is the holy Lord, the Wonderful, the Counselor, the Beautiful in appearance, and the Mighty God, coming on the clouds as the Judge of all men; - all these things did the Scriptures prophesy of Him.”
16. Irenaeus (again): “He received testimony from all that He was very man, and that He was very God, from the Father, from the Spirit, from angels, from the creation itself, from men, from apostate spirits and demons.”
17. Irenaeus (again): “Christ Jesus [is] our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father.”
18. Irenaeus (again): “Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who spoke to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers.”
19. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215): “This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first (for He was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, He alone being both, both God and man-the Author of all blessings to us; by whom we, being taught to live well, are sent on our way to life eternal. . . . . . . The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught us to live well when He appeared as our Teacher; that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never ends”
20. Tertullian (c. 160-225): For God alone is without sin; and the only man without sin is Christ, since Christ is also God.”
21. Tertullian “Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God, as light of light is kindled. . . . That which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and the two are one. In this way also, as He is Spirit of Spirit and God of God, He is made a second in manner of existence-in position, not in nature; and He did not withdraw from the original source, but went forth. This ray of God, then, as it was always foretold in ancient times, descending into a certain virgin, and made flesh in her womb, is in His birth God and man united.”
22. Hippolytus (c. 170-235): “The Logos alone of this God is from God himself; wherefore also the Logos is God, being the substance of God.”
23. Caius (c. 180-217) [in response to those who would question the deity of Christ] “Perhaps what they allege might be credible, did not the Holy Scriptures, in the first place, contradict them. And then, besides, there are writings of certain brethren older than the times of Victor, which they wrote against the heathen in defense of the truth, and against the heresies of their time: I mean Justin and Miltiades, and Tatian and Clement, and many others, in all which divinity is ascribed to Christ. For who is ignorant of the books of Irenaeus and Melito, and the rest, which declare Christ to be God and man? All the psalms, too, and hymns of brethren, which have been written from the beginning by the faithful, celebrate Christ the Word of God, ascribing divinity to Him.”
24. Origen (c. 185-254): “Jesus Christ . . . in the last times, divesting Himself (of His glory), became a man, and was incarnate although God, and while made a man remained the God which He was.”
25. Novatian of Rome (c. 210-280) “For Scripture as much announces Christ as also God, as it announces God Himself as man. It has as much described Jesus Christ to be man, as moreover it has also described Christ the Lord to be God. Because it does not set forth Him to be the Son of God only, but also the Son of man; nor does it only say, the Son of man, but it has also been accustomed to speak of Him as the Son of God. So that being of both, He is both, lest if He should be one only, He could not be the other. For as nature itself has prescribed that he must be believed to be a man who is of man, so the same nature prescribes also that He must be believed to be God who is of God. . . . Let them, therefore, who read that Jesus Christ the Son of man is man, read also that this same Jesus is called also God and the Son of God”
Every chapter in Mark declares Jesus is God.
Honestly I think the debate that MUST happen is a rematch with James White. James White is a fantastic debater and I think a rematch with Bart Ehrman would be the best thing XD
If your talking about Mike Licona . He should do another debate with shabir ally. Since now he’s much more experienced.
11 minutes in, the cats steal the show
Yeah, very clearly he did. Just read Mark.
Michael's cats in the background be like "yeah, I know Jesus is God, it's obvious, now change my hekkin litter!"
But doesn't Jesus say no one knows the time but God so he couldnt answer their question of when is the time of the end...
I think when Jesus responds “no one is good but God” he is saying it as an Ah ha moment, helping him connect the dots that because he is good and only God is good than he must be God. Jesus didn’t call himself God from the start and I think that was for two reasons, number one, he had to have time to teach and go from place to place and perform Miracles and if he was processing himself to be God than the Pharisees would have put him to death sooner and also he wanted the people and his followers to realize for themselves without him flat out telling them which is why he doesn’t deny it at all when they do realize.
Every good gift and perfect gift comes down from the father of lights.... is Jesus good or perfect? Is God the Father perfect, or is the good god someone else?
Every good gift and perfect gift comes down from the father of lights.... is Jesus good or perfect? Is God the Father perfect, or is the good god someone else?
When Jesus went into the Wilderness to pray to the Father was he praying to Himself???
No, there are three persons of the Trinity
Mark 14:64 Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.
Read Mark 1 with "he's a heck of a great guy" in mind. Now, read Mark 1 with "He's God". Which one fits better?
They aren't biographies, they are theological stories written in biographical style. They are great literary works. I really enjoy each authors take on the story.
@joashscottofficial so they aren't theologically motivated? Hmmm
I am not wholly convinced
Yes, they applied things to Jesus to make him the one that Yahweh chose to be the SUPER PROPHET/MESSIAH. Greater than all the others. The one that will be exalted to the right hand of Yahweh to rule as Coregent. Like King and Prince.
Doesn't make him god or literal son of god whatsoever
That literary make no sense. Because they plenty verse in mark showing jesus divinity such as mark 14:61 Jesus claiming to be son of man of daniel 7:13-14 riding from clouds like God isaiah 19:1 psalm 104:1-2 mark 9:7 exodus 16:10 number 16:42 and receiving palach (worship) which was exclusive for God alone daniel 3:17 daniel 6:16 Ezra 7:24
Jesus controls weather just Like God
Mark 4:39 genesis 8:1 psalm 107:25 Jonah 1:4 psalm 135:7 Jeremiah 51:16
Mark 2:8 Jesus able to see thoughts of man which only God can do since his all knowing.
1 kings 8:39
Mark 8:9 Jesus forgave the sins and heal the Paralyzed man but according psalm 103:3 god forgives and heals
Mark 1:3 says John the Baptist was send to prepare the way the path for jesus quoting isaiah 40:3 but Isaiah says John the Baptist will prepare The way for LORD.
Mark 1:8 Jesus is the one sending the Holy Ghost. But according Ezekiel 36:37 god is the one sending his spirit
Mark 2:27 Jesus claims to be Lord over sabbath but according Leviticus 23:3 God owns the Sabbath rightfully him being Lord over sabbath.
He worshipped just like god doing stuff which OT show only God doing. Identify him as God. But people wanna tell me mark depicts Jesus in low christological
View smh!....
I think you just outlined Dr. Licona’s defense of divinity of Jesus in Mark. 😁
Is Bart Erhman a Bible scholar or a textual scholar?
He's a textual critic and actually one of the best in the world.
Unfortunately, he's a really bad theologian.
This was the only book that survived in full in my language.
The priest burned all 500 copies of the full Bible because he didn't believe a native had the authority to translate.
Needless to say I'm super invested in this video.
May I ask what language that is?
Jesus loves you! Call upon the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be SAVED! Get a king james bible and believe. Read Matthew. Read 1 John 4.
@@telleroftheone For sure! It's Abenaki, an Indigenous language in North America
@@MichaelAChristian1 Holman Christian Standard Bible is probably the best modern English translation in my eyes. I took the time to go to school as a linguist, but used some of that time to get into bible translations and reading the Hebrew and Koine Greek. I'm not a scholar by any means, and there are far better biblical translators than I.
Personally, I am very comfortable reading it in those two languages, but I'd rather have it in my own language and that's what I am working towards. If the KJV helps motivate you to read, then read the KJV, but please do not assume that everyone speaks English as to only recommend the KJV. As much as I appreciate your love, I don't want to hear about it, go and live how Jesus instructed, honour God and his creation more in what you do than what you say.
@@SteamShinobi I am not "assuming", you are speaking to me in ENGLISH right now? I don't see how that is being presumptous. Also translating direct from King James that we know is PERFECT is alot easier than learning a dead language hebrew and greek. Also, there are still people who speak greek today. I am letting you know the King James bible is the scriptures in english perfect and already COMPILED. I could use examples if you want to hear it. God help you in your studies.
I'm sorry but the question at 12:57 was not answered to any satisfaction. Can someone please explain why Jesus rebukes the man for calling him good on the grounds that only God can be called good ? Many thanks
@mysotiras 09 Thanks for your response.
I'm sorry to say though that I'm not convinced by that. It sounds like your making assumptions to fit a narrative of his divinity. Presuming that this was some sort of local/provincial teaching technique seems highly unlikely and doesn't fit with the nature of his speech patterns generally. This apparent technique isn't used by him in any other instance as far as I can tell.
Please feel free to show me more convincing evidence though if you can. I'm happy to be corrected.
Thanks.
@mysotiras 09 Yes, Jesus corrected him. At least the rich man thought so because when the rich man continues the conversation, he addresses Jesus as "Teacher" leaving out the "good."
The rich man's words do not imply that Jesus is divine. He called him a "good teacher" merely to be polite.
If Jesus was using a "teaching method" it completely backfired. Instead of convincing the rich man that he's God, Jesus merely persuaded him to stop calling him good.
@mysotiras 09 Again, it's simply not a convincing explanation. And saying that by asking a question he was somehow employing the Socratic method is just very flimsy.
Again, I would ask, please provide a more convincing explanation. I'm open and completely willing to thinking otherwise. Thanks
@@itsmyytaccount8498 Jesus called himself the good shepherd, knowing fully well that David addresses The Lord as his shepherd.
@@princemihavel666 That is a good point and one I had not considered. Thank you for providing a more convincing response to Jesus' divine status. The previous response I read was risible.
👆🙌👏
For the benefit of people who have not yet formed an opinion on this subject and for the benefit of those who have an opinion and are looking for better ways to explain it, I have some suggestions.
The word, “god”, in English means something that is/someone who is worshiped. It is customary, in English, to capitalize the word when referring to the God of Moses. Worship is anything that indicates who has our highest allegiance. (Worship is not limited to what we do in church buildings or in formal or semiformal worship services.)
The enemy of good blinded the minds of men, so that they looked upon God with fear; they thought of him as severe and unforgiving. Satan led men to conceive of God as a being whose chief attribute is stern justice,-one who is a severe judge, a harsh, exacting creditor. He pictured the creator as a being who is watching with jealous eye to discern the errors and mistakes of humans, that He may visit judgments upon us.
The sacrifice of Jesus was not made in order to create in the Father’s heart a love for man, not to make him willing to save. No, no! “God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son.” John 3:16. The Father loves us, not because of Jesus, but He provided Jesus because He loves us. Jesus is the daysman through whom he could pour out His infinite love upon a fallen world. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.” II Corinthians 5:19.
Because of the efforts of Satan (sadly aided and abetted by ostensibly Christian priests for more than a thousand years) to represent “God” and Jesus as working at cross purposes, it is important to maximize our efforts to make it clear what we mean about the nature of Jesus.
Jesus referred to his heavenly Father as also being our Father. I reject the doctrine that Jesus is the result of a sexual act, either in a “spirit world” or on Earth. Instead I teach that Jesus has life in himself - original, unborrowed, underived.
Because Jesus is the person “by whom” everything was made that was made, he is worthy of our worship - which means that it is appropriate to refer to him as “divine”, to refer to his “divinity” or to refer to him as “deity”. At the same time, I can understand how someone who is biblically illiterate might mis-understand the phrase “Jesus is God” to mean that Father and Son are the same person (a doctrine I entirely reject).
If anyone is interested, my illustration doesn’t “prove” anything about the nature of “God” but I have a way to illustrate that something can be one and three at the same time.
P.S. Many people’s working definition of “faith” is: believing something for which there is insufficient evidence - or none. Hebrew 11:1, however, offers an alternative to that popular definition of faith: Faith is the evidence of things not seen (things we can’t observe with our five senses or measure with scientific instruments). Please, if anyone reading this hasn’t already done so, obtain a Bible with marginal references and read the Gospels looking up the places in the Hebrew Bible that are quoted or referenced by the writers of the Gospels. Doing so will provide you with abundant evidence both of the divinity of Jesus and of the reliability of the biblical record.
@@mmss3199 It would be pointless to argue about this. If you prefer to think “NT writers heavily (mis) quote Hebrew Scripture”, a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
On the other hand - for the benefit of other people who might be following this discussion thread:
Before Jesus returned to heaven, the Gospels had not been compiled and most or all of the Epistles hadn’t even been written. The Hebrew Bible or a translation of the Hebrew Bible was “the Bible Jesus used”. By one estimate, Jesus quoted from it sixteen times and, in a couple of those cases, he quoted more than one scripture passage.
That number (sixteen) doesn't include at least as many additional times he alluded to Bible characters and events without actually quoting scripture. And that doesn’t include the entire Road to Emmaus discourse (which isn’t recorded).
If you include quotations and allusion by Jesus, Paul and other apostles, estimates run into the hundreds.
In order to validate your claim that the Hebrew Bible was “heavily” misquoted, it would be necessary to list at least a dozen “misquotations” so we can decide for ourselves whether the meaning of the Hebrew Bible was being twisted or misrepresented.
Mark 2:28 "Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath.”
Please pin if you read this Mike
Is the life of Alexander a theological biographical story?
I prefer “deity” to “god” or “divinity”.
Anthony Rogers is the man you want to go to he goes way more in depth!
Believing one is actually God ...is not the same, as one actually going around spouting it off... like Shirley MacLaine did fo a awhile...if for no other reason, than as in Shirley's case it is not particularly effective tactic to gain followers...In the Synoptics (and John as well for that matter) Jesus tended to want folks come to that understanding themselves...and when they chose to do worship(they don't always) He never corrects them...as both holy men and angels do when others try to inappropriately worship and honor them...
I just tried purchasing through your link and it automatically takes me to Bart Ehrman's website and it will give him credit not to you.
So how did 1st century Jews interpret Daniel 7 and Enoch? I doubt they were expecting a divine human... how did they read this? It seems strange that for a man to say they fulfil this prophecy would be considered blasphemy, weren't they expecting this prophecy to be fulfilled?
There’s a better way of showing Jesus divinity in Galatians. 48AD pre-Jerusalem council and Paul says…
“… Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead” Gal 1:1b
So we have a risen Christ OK cool in 48AD. Then Paul says…
“… Christ who lives in me.” Gal 2:20b
Sorry Christ lives in you? Surely not literally? Jesus would not have enough space to live inside you. So you mean, spiritually? But men cannot live in the hearts of other men, so could this Jesus Christ be more than a man? Paul then talks about…
“… In Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith…” Gal 3:26
And…
“… Baptised into Christ have put on Christ.” Gal 3:27
So through the baptism we can be made Sons of God through Jesus? Men can do that? I didn’t know. And we can put on Christ? How do we “put on” a man? Then…
“… Until Christ is formed in you!” Gal 4:19
Christ can form in us? OK…
“… Persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit…” Gal 4:29
So Christ was born according to the Spirit interesting. It sounds as if this Christ is more than a man 🤔 even in the oldest extant Christian document.